120 s'lMDlKS I\ INDIAN COT'l'ONS 



cultivatod over wide areas thei'e arises a considerable degree of adap- 

 tation to particular conditions, and no single area will ho found in 

 which the numerous forms can be cultivated under conditions 

 which admit of successful study. Even among the Indian indi- 

 genous foi'ius ceitaiii occur whicli, owing to th(> lengthened period 

 of vegetative growth, it is impossible to study in full detail under 

 the climatic conditions prevalent at Cawnpore. 



While, therefore, opportunity for such I'evision is lacking, it is 

 possible to indicate reasons which would seem to throw doubts on 

 the ])resent systems. The two most fuHv developed are those of 

 Todaro. published in 1S77 in his •' Rel. sulla Cultura dei Cotoni in 

 Italia", and by Watt in 1907 in his '' Wild and Cultivated Cottons of 

 the World." The foiiuer classification is based on the observation 

 of living plants giown in Italy. The chief defect is the failure to 

 distinguish clearly between the two types of branches especially 

 the secondary branches. These may be monopodial or sympodial. 

 The value of this particular character in a systematic scheme may 

 be open to some doubt, but the economic importance of clearly 

 recognising the two types is indisputable. This ])oint will be re- 

 ferred to in some detail later. In the latter, this (luestion of habit 

 is again lelegated to a position of insignificance. The author has 

 an extended knowledge of the Indian cottons from personal expe- 

 rience and he has made an exhaustive study of the luaterial col- 

 lected in the vast luajoiity of thv herbaria of the world. We are 

 tempted to think that, in a |)lant like cotton, the mat(Mial thus pi-e- 

 served may be very misleading. It is not too much to say that, 

 owing to this diffei-ence in habit, two totally distinct types 7night l)e 

 represented in a herbaiiuni by material showing no recognisable 

 differences. Thus the secondary branch of a sympodial type may 

 appear identical with the tertiary bianch of a monopodial type and 

 unless the exact position fiom which it has been taken has l)een 

 noted it will be impossible to determine the type to which it belonged. 

 The author attaches considerable ituportance to the presence or 

 absence of a fuzz in addition to the floss of the cultivatetl foinis. 

 Thus his section II is characterised as Fuzzy-seeded cottons with 

 united biacteoles : his section 1 1 1 as Fuzzy-seeded cottons with 



